Misplaced Pages

Talk:Antisemitism in the United Kingdom: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:33, 21 June 2019 editZScarpia (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers11,062 edits Deleting Miko Peled reference: -- comment.← Previous edit Revision as of 16:59, 21 June 2019 edit undoZScarpia (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers11,062 edits Deleting Miko Peled reference: -- comment.Next edit →
Line 51: Line 51:
:Some comments: :Some comments:
:* It's fairly questionable that the incident involving Miko Peled deserves mention in an article covering the whole subject of antisemitism in the United Kingdom, particularly when that article is supposed to be encyclopaedic in style, and particularly when the cited source is an article in ''The Guardian'', which was condemned in the Birkbeck College, Media Reform Coalition report on reporting on the the Labour Party antisemitism controversy, citing an article from ''The Daily Mail''. :* It's fairly questionable that the incident involving Miko Peled deserves mention in an article covering the whole subject of antisemitism in the United Kingdom, particularly when that article is supposed to be encyclopaedic in style, and particularly when the cited source is an article in ''The Guardian'', which was condemned in the Birkbeck College, Media Reform Coalition report on reporting on the the Labour Party antisemitism controversy, citing an article from ''The Daily Mail''.
:* The current Misplaced Pages article states: "Miko Peled, who stated that people ought to be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened." That wholly distorts what Peled is reported to have said: "This is about free speech, the freedom to criticise and to discuss every issue, whether it’s the Holocaust: yes or no, Palestine, the liberation, the whole spectrum. There should be no limits on the discussion." :* The current Misplaced Pages article states: "Miko Peled, who stated that people ought to be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened." That wholly distorts what Peled is reported to have said: "This is about free speech, the freedom to criticise and to discuss every issue, whether it’s the Holocaust: yes or no, Palestine, the liberation, the whole spectrum. There should be no limits on the discussion." In fact, I think that the current text should be deleted on WP:BRD grounds and if anyone thinks that it should be re-instated, they should be made to argue it out on the appropriate noticeboard.
:* In the UK, the current situation is that it is permitted to discuss or criticise what is said about the Holocaust and there is no great pressure to change that; Peled is therefore just saying that should continue, along with free speech on other subjects, including Palestine. :* In the UK, the current situation is that it is permitted to discuss or criticise what is said about the Holocaust and there is no great pressure to change that; Peled is therefore just saying that should continue, along with free speech on other subjects, including Palestine.
:* Peled was speaking at a meeting organised by the Free Speech on Israel group whose title appeared to be "How Israel Silences Its Critics: Why We Oppose the Witch Hunt". He made a passing reference to the Holocaust in a reply given during the question and answer session which followed his talk. It's noticeable that the whole context of the comment is missing in newspaper reports: the questin which was asked isn't described; nor is the gist of the reply. In subsequent comments Peled clarified that he'd been talking about whether the expression of a variety of views should be treated as criminal. :* Peled was speaking at a meeting organised by the Free Speech on Israel group whose title appeared to be "How Israel Silences Its Critics: Why We Oppose the Witch Hunt". He made a passing reference to the Holocaust in a reply given during the question and answer session which followed his talk. It's noticeable that the whole context of the comment is missing in newspaper reports: the questin which was asked isn't described; nor is the gist of the reply. In subsequent comments Peled clarified that he'd been talking about whether the expression of a variety of views should be treated as criminal.

Revision as of 16:59, 21 June 2019

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Antisemitism in the United Kingdom article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconArticles for creation
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
Note icon
This article was accepted on 23 June 2013 by reviewer Jamesx12345 (talk · contribs).
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconJudaism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconDiscrimination Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconJewish history Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconUnited Kingdom Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligion: Interfaith Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIsrael Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconEthnic groups Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconHistory Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconEuropean history Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconMiddle Ages Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconChristianity Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2



This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Why is is is entry ignoring a key dynamic at the heart of the anti-Semitism debate in the UK?

There is no balance in this article to counter the false assumption made in it that arguments against actions by the government or military of Israel, or against Zionism, are automatically anti-Semitic. In this way the article is one sided and pushes a false narrative that can in itself be seen as anti-Semitic since it employs the very same tactic used by extremist anti-Semites who would blame all Jews for the actions of Israel or extreme Zionists. That assumption should not appear as a flat assumption in this article - it should be stated that in the debate about anti-Semitism in the UK, one side is trying to push that assumption and is being criticised for doing so as both an attempt to shut down criticism of Israel and extreme Zionism and as a dangerous use of the same conflation employed by extreme anti-Semites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.87.35 (talkcontribs) 07:54, May 11, 2018 (UTC)

RFC at Jackie Walker

https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Jackie_Walker_(activist)#Request_for_comment_can_we_say_Jackie_Walker_is_Jewish Slatersteven (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Deleting Miko Peled reference

I am proposing this passage be deleted: Deputy leader Tom Watson, promised there would be an investigation on how the party provided a platform at a conference fringe event to Miko Peled, who stated, as reported by the Daily Mail, that people ought to be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened. Watson in response said, "It is nothing to do with the official Labour party conference. And, if there was Holocaust denial there, these people have no right to be in the Labour party and, if they are, they should be expelled." Peled responded to the accusations by saying that Watson and Ashworth were confusing freedom of speech with antisemitism, tweeting "free speech is now antisemitism too." Peled said he did not deny the Holocaust. At a later meeting at University College London in November 2017, Pelod complained about a "witch-hunt against antisemites and Holocaust deniers" and said Corbyn had "put away" the "nonsense" about those issues. See Thomas, Alastair (12 November 2017). "Miko Peled: Zionists do not deserve a platform". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 12 November 2017.</ref>

I do not think it is particularly relevant to the article. Peled is not British. He did not attack British Jews. He mentioned freedom of expression on the Holocaust in passing (four words) at a meeting about Free speech and Israel but says that he does not deny the Holocaust. He was speaking at a fringe meeting of a Labour Party conference i.e. the meeting was not organized by the Labour Party but by individual members, at which he spoke along with a range of other speakers. WP:PROPORTION I also think these four words at a meeting is pretty trivial in an article on 1000 years' history of a serious subject and lowers the bar of significance far too low. May it be deleted? Jontel (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

The issue is that Labour gave a platform, whether at a fringe event or not, to someone who thinks people should be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened. That is what Watson's response was about. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 22:02, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
No, Labour did not give anyone a platform. Anybody can organise a fringe meeting around the party conference, the party has absolutely no say in the content, platform or even the existence of such a meeting. Irrespective of the content of Peled's words (and I would agree that he has been cited totally out of context), the fact remains that his hosts were an independent group, some but not all of whose members are Labour Party members, which is not in any way answerable to or under the direction of the Labour Party. RolandR (talk) 11:13, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Labour will have accepted a fringe meeting on Israel and free speech. For Labour to be responsible, they would have to: 1) had the list of speakers, 2) known that Peled had views on the permissability of questioning whether the Holocaust happened, which is not otherwise mentioned on his Misplaced Pages entry, 3) known that he was going to raise it in connection with the meeting's subject. There is no evidence for any of this. So, I don't see that the episode indicates that the Labour Party acted in an antisemitic way on this occasion, which is presumably the rationale for including it. Tom Watson's response is not a rationale for inclusion; he thought there was Holocaust denial, when there was not. Jontel (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
RSes see this as relevant. It happend in the UK, at the conference of one of the two largest parties. Observers and experts were alarmed that Labour hosted such hate speech, and this was covered by relevant sources. IDONTLIKE aside - there is no arguement here for removal.Icewhiz (talk) 11:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
This is all arguable. It was a fringe meeting, so unofficial, and organisations cannot be held liable for everything their lobbyists or fringe groups do. A single phrase is hardly significant hate speech, especially in context. The Guardian is careful to ascribe the report to the Daily Mail, which is not an RS. I presume the observers and experts you mention are pro-Israeli and so would be inclined to be hostile to the pro Palestinian Peled and fringe meeting organisers. Jontel (talk) 12:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Being or not being pro-Israeli is irrelevant. Here is the Guardian - "Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, has said the party will investigate how it gave a platform at a conference fringe event to a speaker who said people should be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened. The remarks by the Israeli-American author Miko Peled have renewed alarm about antisemitism in the Labour party.... It seems Labour itself and RSes are concerned over support in Labour events for Holocaust denial.Icewhiz (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that's what the article says, not what Tom Watson said, which was different. He seems to think that there was Holocaust denial, "And if there was Holocaust denial there" when there was not. And who is alarmed, apart from the journalists concerned - the article does not say. We rely on RS for their reporting of facts, not for their opinions. Jontel (talk) 22:10, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Lets not be coy here. Here's continuing coverage by Telegraph in September 2018 - "Jeremy Corbyn has been swept up in a fresh anti-Semitism row after he was pictured with an activist who has previously called for Holocaust denial to be treated as free speech.. .
Some comments:
  • It's fairly questionable that the incident involving Miko Peled deserves mention in an article covering the whole subject of antisemitism in the United Kingdom, particularly when that article is supposed to be encyclopaedic in style, and particularly when the cited source is an article in The Guardian, which was condemned in the Birkbeck College, Media Reform Coalition report on reporting on the the Labour Party antisemitism controversy, citing an article from The Daily Mail.
  • The current Misplaced Pages article states: "Miko Peled, who stated that people ought to be allowed to question whether the Holocaust happened." That wholly distorts what Peled is reported to have said: "This is about free speech, the freedom to criticise and to discuss every issue, whether it’s the Holocaust: yes or no, Palestine, the liberation, the whole spectrum. There should be no limits on the discussion." In fact, I think that the current text should be deleted on WP:BRD grounds and if anyone thinks that it should be re-instated, they should be made to argue it out on the appropriate noticeboard.
  • In the UK, the current situation is that it is permitted to discuss or criticise what is said about the Holocaust and there is no great pressure to change that; Peled is therefore just saying that should continue, along with free speech on other subjects, including Palestine.
  • Peled was speaking at a meeting organised by the Free Speech on Israel group whose title appeared to be "How Israel Silences Its Critics: Why We Oppose the Witch Hunt". He made a passing reference to the Holocaust in a reply given during the question and answer session which followed his talk. It's noticeable that the whole context of the comment is missing in newspaper reports: the questin which was asked isn't described; nor is the gist of the reply. In subsequent comments Peled clarified that he'd been talking about whether the expression of a variety of views should be treated as criminal.
    ←   ZScarpia   16:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

antisemitism or anti-Semitism? antisemitic or anti-Semitic? antisemite or anti-Semite?

I can see that multiple variations are used across this article with little consistency. Though I think quoted text should remain as-written, it is a little jarring to see different versions interchanged even within a single paragraph. Can we come to a consensus on one version and stick with it? I've noticed that some articles (such as Adolf Hitler) use the hyphenated version exclusively, while the Misplaced Pages series (and the article on Antisemitism itself) exclude the hyphen.

Bonus reading: What’s in a hyphen? Why writing anti-Semitism with a dash distorts its meaning Domeditrix (talk) 11:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

This has been discussed previously at very great length, and the clear consensus was to prefer and use the form "antisemitism", except when citing a direct quote which hyphenates the term. See the section "Anti-Semitism" here and linked articles. If there are any inconsistencies in this article, they should be resolved accordingly. RolandR (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! There are a fair few pages that need a lot of editing then... Domeditrix (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I can see why the version without the hyphen is felt to be better. However, I can also see that the BBC, British Library and nearly every dictionary uses the hyphen. So, it could be a long battle to insist on one version against all other authorities. Jontel (talk) 17:56, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
It was a long battle, and was resolved in favour of the non-hyphenated form. One reason is that the hyphenated form implies the existence of a phenomenon of "Semitism", and an organised opposition to it. That is why nearly all academics and activists involved in the issue prefer the unhyphenated form.RolandR (talk) 19:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  1. Elgot 2017. sfn error: no target: CITEREFElgot2017 (help)
  2. Weaver & Elgot 2017. sfn error: no target: CITEREFWeaverElgot2017 (help)
Categories: